Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
really?  any reason for saying that or just a prejudice against so-called conspiracy theories that question first ever recorded lack of wreckage after such an impact?  
by manon (m@gmail.com) on Fri Sep 15th, 2006 at 04:28:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Why do you keep claiming lack of wreckage after I pointed you to photos of wreckage?

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Fri Sep 15th, 2006 at 04:34:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]
wreckage?  no plane wreckage that I can see?  no engines, no seats, no luggage, no bodies

I see a whole in a building, soot marks on the grass and some on the Pentagon, and broken windows

I don't see any plane wreckage

by manon (m@gmail.com) on Fri Sep 15th, 2006 at 04:46:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Having covered others elsewhere, I'll continue the pictoral proof that you didn't look at my links here:

engine:

hole cut by the right-side engine next to the smashed generator:

wreckage of seats behind the Honeywell GTCP331-200 APU:



*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Fri Sep 15th, 2006 at 05:04:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I see one diffuser case, one turbine wheel, a few fuel hoses, one fuel or oil valve, some electric cabling and a little bit of fuselage

I could fit it in one large suitcase

the point of the makers of the film was that that was ALL the wreckage that existed.  now compare that to another airplane wreckage and you'll find that there isn't a lot here

where's the rest of the seats, engines, fuselage, luggage, etc?  I don't even see little bits of them on the ground

and look at the cable spools - they look intact

by manon (m@gmail.com) on Fri Sep 15th, 2006 at 05:12:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]
How many times do you change the story? First you claimed there was no wreckage. Then that there was no sign of the engines. Then that the plane is claimed to have been vaporized literally (torn to molecules), rather than little pieces. Having shown you examples against all three (wreckage pieces both large and small, engine pieces, lots of small pieces lying on the grass), now you shift to claim that my examples are "all". (And no that large piece in my other picture comment is not from the bow.) Well if you would check my links at last, you'd see a couple of other photos, and those are again only brought up as examples in longer aticles. I also posted more photos of structural parts down below. (And these pieces definitely don't fit into a suitcase.)

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Fri Sep 15th, 2006 at 05:45:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Here we go again - the difference between a physicist and an engineer

physicist:  none =0.000000

engineer:  0 ± 1 or 2

by none, I meant not a lot.  You don't even have enough parts to build 1/10 of an engine there.  there are 2 engines.  about 150 seats and at least 100 people with their baggage.  (other engineers would understand that, by the way.)

by manon (m@gmail.com) on Fri Sep 15th, 2006 at 06:00:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]
looking at the diffuser case, I am surprised that the injectors were knocked right out of their holes.  they're fastened pretty tight in there.  all of them seemed to be gone too.  pretty extraordinary.  
by manon (m@gmail.com) on Fri Sep 15th, 2006 at 06:02:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

And sprinkling the thread with "1" and "2" ratings and using a righteous, insulted tone does little for your credibility.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Fri Sep 15th, 2006 at 04:34:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The thread might have turned out differently if you had said "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" initially, instead of bringing up Kos' banning policy.

Those whom the Gods wish to destroy They first make mad. — Euripides
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Sep 15th, 2006 at 04:38:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]
You honestly think so?

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Fri Sep 15th, 2006 at 04:53:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Well, yes, the entire pie fight is a subthread of "Oh for God's Sake", and manon got instantly defensive as a result of your comment.  Let me run the direct thread leading to this comment past you:
manon: I just watched "Loose Change"
Fran: The conspiracy thing just doesn't seem to go away
manon: What convinced me was the pentagon crash
Jerome: I don't intend to ban anyone on this like on dKos, but I find the topic tasteless, pointless and mindless.
manon: so I guess this isn't really an open thread, is it?
Jerome: Oh it's open. Which also includes the right to say that what you write is silly and worse.
manon: Really?  any reason for saying that or just a prejudice?
Jerome: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. And sprinkling the thread with "1" and "2" ratings and using a righteous, insulted tone does little for your credibility.
Migeru: The thread might have turned out differently if you had said "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" initially, instead of bringing up Kos' banning policy.
Jerome: You honestly think so?
I honestly do.

Those whom the Gods wish to destroy They first make mad. — Euripides
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Sep 15th, 2006 at 05:08:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Well, being scrupulously fair, I'm sure you'll put somewhere in the wiki that my policy regarding conspiracy theories is "show me the beef"  and that I have little patience for assertions that rely heavily on title rather than on actual content.

You may note also that, apart form my initial comment, I dropped in at comment 80 or 90. Obviously I was not successful at stopping this silliness. Maybe I should have censored things, since I'm accused of it anyway.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Fri Sep 15th, 2006 at 05:11:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]
You were successful at starting them, then come in 80 or 90 comments later and accude manon of being incivil.

I am not going to put anything "somewhere in the wiki" about your policy on anything. There are places for admins to put those kinds of things.

Those whom the Gods wish to destroy They first make mad. — Euripides

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Sep 15th, 2006 at 05:25:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Migeru, there's something like 1 hr 10 mins between

I guess this isn't really an open thread..?

and

Oh it's open. Which also includes the right...

1 hr and 10 mins of invective.

Your "montage" isn't of any help because it doesn't reflect the real flow of the thread.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Fri Sep 15th, 2006 at 05:16:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Well, I am sorry, that's how I see it. My point was that the invective has its origin in the mention of Kos' banning policy.

But you make a good point.

Those whom the Gods wish to destroy They first make mad. — Euripides

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Sep 15th, 2006 at 05:21:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]
had its origin in an unsubstantiated "9/11 did not happen" assertion.


In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Fri Sep 15th, 2006 at 05:23:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]
mais non

No one is saying 9-11 did not happen.

Some people are just questioning how it happened.

Remember the magic bullet in the JFK assassination?

Questioning established facts is not a bad thing, IMHO.

You guys see wreckage, and I see a few items.  You guys see proof from the burn marks on the building, I don't see anything of the sort.  

Why is that a bad thing?

by manon (m@gmail.com) on Fri Sep 15th, 2006 at 05:42:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I agree.

Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. -Voltaire
by p------- on Fri Sep 15th, 2006 at 05:04:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I don't.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Fri Sep 15th, 2006 at 05:07:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Naturally.

Those whom the Gods wish to destroy They first make mad. — Euripides
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Sep 15th, 2006 at 05:09:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Indeed.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Fri Sep 15th, 2006 at 05:13:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]
But of course.

Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. -Voltaire
by p------- on Fri Sep 15th, 2006 at 05:44:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]
This sub-thread is laughable. And I mean that literally. Or 'lol' as it is also written.

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se
by A swedish kind of death on Fri Sep 15th, 2006 at 08:33:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series